Case Law Details
Ozone Projects Private Limited Vs Commissioner of Service Tax (CESTAT Chennai)
CESTAT Chennai held that as there is no tax liability on the advance amount received by the appellant, demand of interest thereon unsustainable.
Facts- The appellant is registered with the Service Tax Commissionerate for various services including works contract service. During the course of audit of accounts, it was noticed that the appellant was engaged in providing construction services for a project viz. “Metro Zone” at Anna Nagar, Chennai. Later, the appellant did not provide the services and also had to return the advance received along with compensations. The Department was of the view that the appellant was liable to pay Service Tax on the advance received.
Further, the appellant had engaged various services for residential construction to be handed over to an assessee, for which also Service Tax was not paid by the appellant. The appellant had collected electricity charges, water / CMWSSB charges and infrastructure charges from various allottees, which were includible in their taxable value and the appellant had not discharged Service Tax on such charges contending that these are reimbursable expenses. That they had availed ineligible credit on architectural fees, construction charges incurred for interior work of guest house, Sodexo Pass, insurance, air travel, etc., which according to the Department was wrongly availed; that the appellant had to pay interest on the irregularly availed CENVAT Credit which was also utilized by them. Further, that the appellant had not discharged Service Tax on the expenses incurred by them during the import of professional and technical consultancy service under reverse charge mechanism.
Vide order impugned herein dropped certain demands, however confirmed a portion of the Service Tax demand. Aggrieved by such order, the appellant is now before the Tribunal.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
